Literally nobody will obey this.

I’m not in Vancouver itself, but a major road near me had its speed limit dropped to accommodate mixed-use expansions. Not a single driver actually does the new speed limit. They all speed 20-30kph over the limit and they will tailgate you or highbeam flash if you do the posted limit.

Maybe some day in the distant future our policy-makers will understand that updating a few signs doesn’t make a damn difference. You need physical speed reduction methods such as speedbumps, roundabouts, raised crosswalks, etc.

Fully closing some streets to vehicle traffic also helps. It not only reduces collisions but also increases vehicle throughput.

The change in Vancouver is specifically aimed at minor streets though, where other traffic calming measures are usually already in place. And the reduced speed is a climate measure more than a safety measure.

Maybe some day in the distant future our policy-makers will understand that updating a few signs doesn’t make a damn difference.

Yes it does, even if compliance is low, and the reason is what you yourself is saying

You need physical speed reduction methods such as speedbumps, roundabouts, raised crosswalks, etc.

Traffic engineers won’t do these road diets on 50km/h streets. Changing the speed limit is an important first step that enables further changes to road infrastructure to help enforce the updated speed limits. This sweeping change is a MAJOR victory, that has been argued for many years. That we were able to pass this for so many neighbourhoods at once is great news and should be celebrated.

This was discussed at length during the council meeting, including later in the same day where another vote was passed to update the commitments and plans for the municipal Vision Zero initiative, which are in fact going to require infrastructure projects.

What about just enforcement?

So how much time will this add to most trips, in the end?

Edit: I have no formed opinion on this policy. I don’t even know which side is downvoting me, lol.

30 is crazy slow, either make more pedestrian paths or allow the cars, not 30 everywhere, remove the vehicle lanes if you have to, one way conversions maybe.

Bicycles go faster than that on the bicycle paths.

They actually changed the road to accommodate mixed usage while lowering it? Lucky you!

Here there just taking big roads designed for 50, and making them 40 with zero plans to change the roadway to encourage the lower speed.

Downhill, maybe. I average like 20, though I don’t push super hard.

Speed doesn’t get you around faster in urban areas, especially not in residential neighbourhoods, because stop signs and traffic lights (when not ignored) extend your trip more.

That’s why as a cyclist, I’m often catching up to cars going 3-4x faster than me. And when cars are queued up at stops, I’m often passing those “fast” cars, too.

But 30km/h is less likely to kill people, which is a good thing.

I’m already getting aggressively tailgated where I live when I follow the 40km/h limit. I don’t see this going well, unfortunately.

On a mountain bike tire maybe, but a roadbike tire and dual chain ring and cassette, if you aren’t a kid or senior you can easily do 30km/h and sustain it. Downhill sections I have seen 55-60 km/h on my bike computer, and that is with little effort because my front end gets twitchy when the grade is steep and speed is that high

I was thinking more relaxed, city streets, stop signs every block. Average speed.

True, but If you have been to Vancouver you’d know that cyclists don’t stop at stop signs

I can throw a rock and hit Vancouver!

Mind I’d have to walk a few minutes first.

Even with rolling stops, my tracking usually puts me around 20, 25 if I hustle a bit.

Not much overall I would guess. Most people going 60-70 in a 50 zone usually just end up getting to the next red light faster, wasting their gas and wearing down their brakes faster.

What tires are you running on?

A bicycle has significantly less mass than a car or truck, so even if bicycles are traveling that fast regularly the risk is significantly lower in the event of a collision.

People are downvoting you because your question is implying driver delays are not worth the increase in safety. Drivers are often protesting nearly anything that slows them down even when that thing slowing them down has been proven to save lives.

Huh. Is there a way I could have asked that without implying an answer, or a value judgement about the answer?

Like, if it was two hours on every trip I’d say it’s not worth the added safety, but a lot of driving tends to happen off of local streets anyway, so I was honestly wondering.